Greatest Latino Fighters Ever

[K-DOGG]

Seeing as how Chavez looked so good againt De La Hoya and Kostya Tszyu I suppose we shoud count those too.

[cyberthugpatrol]

Apples and oranges.

so who is the apple and who is the orange ?

boils down to Roberto Duran is over-rated and over-hyped. the guy is a hall of famer but cannot carry Salvador Sanchez's or JCC's jockstrap

[cyberthugpatrol]

Seeing as how Chavez looked so good againt De La Hoya and Kostya Tszyu I suppose we shoud count those too.

went out on his feet, even past his prime

unlike someone who got LAID out IN his prime

[K-DOGG]

I could just as easily argue that Duran lost more and was laid out because he wasn't protected for the second half of his career like Chavez.

After Julio nearly lost to Taylor and did lose to Whitaker Don King never put him in with a dangerous opponent again until De La Hoya. Maybe if Duran had had Don King as a promoter he would have a "better record" beating up on the Lonnie Smiths of the world.


But no, Duran had to go and fight the best into his 40's while Chavez was on a magical mystery tour against retreads Frankie Randall and Ivan Robinson.

[hhascup]

greb lost to many ****ty fighters, henry armstrong lost to many ****ty fighters, try again. Hagler went on to win anyways. Duran is not bad at all, i kinda like him actually. However, he isnt invincible like the way people say he is. Julio cesar chavez had a legit chance of owning him.

I rest my case, when you say things like this. Again, when you know a little bit about the sport of boxing, PLEASE let me know and we can talk like adults.

Most boxing experts have Armstrong and Greb in their all-time pound for pound list. If fact here's what Kellerman and Atlas have:

Max Kellerman:
1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Henry Armstrong
3. Muhammad Ali
4. Harry Greb
5. Sam Langford
6. Pernell Whitaker
7. Roberto Duran
8. Willie Pep
9. Benny Leonard
10. Ezzard Charles
10a. Jimmy Wilde


Tony Atlas:
1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Henry Armstrong
3. Muhammad Ali
4. Benny Leonard
5. Sam Langford
6. Harry Greb
7. Mickey Walker
8. Roberto Duran
9. Gene Tunney
10. Carlos Monzon
10a. Joe Louis

My top 5 pound for pound are:

Sugar Ray Robinson, Henry Armstrong, Willie Pep, Muhammad Ali and Joe Louis, in no special order.

[brownpimp88]

[QUOTE=K-DOGG;2014814]I could just as easily argue that Duran lost more and was laid out because he wasn't protected for the second half of his career like Chavez.



no, chavez was simply smarter. He wasnt dumb enough to fight at 160 and 167 when he still had years left in him like duran did. Duran should have stayed at 147 for the max, he knew he didnt belong in there.

[K-DOGG]

no, chavez was simply smarter. He wasnt dumb enough to fight at 160 and 167 when he still had years left in him like duran did. Duran should have stayed at 147 for the max, he knew he didnt belong in there.

Sooo, you're saying Chavez's juevos weren't as big as Durans.

[brownpimp88]

I rest my case, when you say things like this. Again, when you know a little bit about the sport of boxing, PLEASE let me know and we can talk like adults.

Most boxing experts have Armstrong and Greb in their all-time pound for pound list. If fact here's what Kellerman and Atlas have:

Max Kellerman:
1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Henry Armstrong
3. Muhammad Ali
4. Harry Greb
5. Sam Langford
6. Pernell Whitaker
7. Roberto Duran
8. Willie Pep
9. Benny Leonard
10. Ezzard Charles
10a. Jimmy Wilde


Tony Atlas:
1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Henry Armstrong
3. Muhammad Ali
4. Benny Leonard
5. Sam Langford
6. Harry Greb
7. Mickey Walker
8. Roberto Duran
9. Gene Tunney
10. Carlos Monzon
10a. Joe Louis

My top 5 pound for pound are:

Sugar Ray Robinson, Henry Armstrong, Willie Pep, Muhammad Ali and Joe Louis, in no special order.

again that is based on accomplishements and monzon dodged hagler, what does that tell you. He choose to defend his belt against lesser opponents when he knew hagler was supposed to get the title shot.

[Orishaman]

Duderino...I am not nearly as familiar with Nicolino Locche's work as I am with Eder Jofre's work. That's why I rate him considerably lower in favor of the rest of these fighters. I have seen some limited footage of Locche and I understand that his defensive ability was top notch and he was a real technitian. Maybe it's his competition (outside of his great win over Antonio Cervantes and his battles with Ortiz) that I question.

It's much more reasonable (in my opinion) to rate fighters that you have a frame of reference with. It's no disrespect to the fighter, rather just a lack of knowledge as to that fighters history.

Nothing wrong with Eder...he just disapearead as fast aas he came to the scene...Nico was a master of defence...very underated IMO, as good as anyone is history including Wil O' Whisp....and the Radar.... masterfulll...if you have a chance to see him fights ...do!! But I respect what you are saying, plus the fact that you have a reason it is cool half the cats here just write a one liner and that;s the xtent of their knowledge.....

[brownpimp88]

Sooo, you're saying Chavez's juevos weren't as big as Durans.

I'm saying chavez had a longer time frame as an awesome boxer, it lasted 12 full years. He stopped fighting D level streetbums after he won in 84. Duran was still fighting NOOBS during his reign in the 70's.